obviously it can be included as it is mentioned in the eightfold path section in the maha satipatthana but how does it fit in with everything else? should i do vipassana sitting meditation in addition to jhana or will jhana suffice as a substitute?

Thus have I heard:Samatha Jhana is used to temporarily eliminate the defilements, and set up the perfect conditions for doing satipatthana.

Some people say you should first get some level of jhanic attainment and then switch to satipatthana. Eg: get to the first jhana, then start the real work of satipatthana.Some say you just need Access Concentration, then switch to satipatthana.Some say you just need Momentary Concentration, and pretty much blend samatha and satipatthana into a single practise.

Anyway, that's what I've been told by some monks and books.

Then, saturated with joy, you will put an end to suffering and stress.SN 9.11

Satipatthana includes anapanasati and anapanasati can both be used for jhana as well as for the culmination of satipatthana.

"Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference (satipatthana) to their culmination. The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for awakening (one of the factors is samadhi, not to mention piti which is a jhana factor) to their culmination. The seven factors for awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination.

"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."

Oh no now it's all getting mixed up with Vipassana Jhanas, which are totally different from Samatha Jhanas, which is what people are usually talking about when they mention jhana.

When the subject of jhana has been brought up here on DW, I have gotten abused for asking which definition of jhana is meant, given that there are any number of competing notions of jhana floating around out there (and combatively argued on this forum). Now, given that this is the "Insight" section, a discussion of the Vipassana Jhanas is appropriate here. Also, Vipassana Jhanas look a lot like the the jhanas the sutta-only-ists talk about as opposed to those (according to some sutta-only-ists) dreaded, gawdawful, to be spurned, and looked down upon commentarial/Visuddhimaghga jhanas, and the Vipassana Jhanas, as we hear in this talk by Joseph Goldstein, are talked about the in a context of actual, real life practice.

What historical bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

U Pandita, and contrary to your "should have" I think the idea of the Vipassana Jhanas gives an interesting look at the actual practice of vipassana as it is practiced. And, most importantly, given the obsession about -- and the wanting of-- jhana experience that we see commonly expressed here, it opens up the jhana issue, making it far more accessible and practicle in terms of actual meditative practice.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

What historical bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

U Pandita, and contrary to your "should have" I think the idea of the Vipassana Jhanas gives an interesting look at the actual practice of vipassana as it is practiced. And, most importantly, given the obsession about -- and the wanting of-- jhana experience that we see commonly expressed here, it opens up the jhana issue, making it far more accessible and practicle in terms of actual meditative practice.

U Pandita was the first to coin the term Vipassana Jhana, but I believe that the concept exists under the name lakkhaṇūpanijjhāna (I think that translates to Jhana based on the characteristics but I'm no Pali scholar) in the commentaries. Personally, I think the distinction of different types of Jhana makes a lot of sense and most of the controversy regarding the Jhanas has to do with not distinguishing the two and clarifying about which one is talking about.

The non-doing of any evil, The performance of what's skillful,The cleansing of one's own mind: This is the Buddhas' teaching.

Oh no now it's all getting mixed up with Vipassana Jhanas, which are totally different from Samatha Jhanas, which is what people are usually talking about when they mention jhana.

What historical bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

I don't think they are that different. I think that they have all the same factors as each other, the only difference being Vipassana Jhana has one of the four Satipatthana as its object and Samatha Jhana has something else as its object.

I think there are some clear examples of Vipassana Jhana even in the Suttas themselves.Take a look at MN 111 for example. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.htmlIn it, the Ven. Sariputta goes through the Jhanas and analyses their Jhana factors and sees them as impermanent. That sounds like Vipassana Jhana to me. In fact, I am of the opinion that many if not most of the teachers who teach Jhana these days are also teaching Vipassana Jhana because they base it on the Satipatthana.

The non-doing of any evil, The performance of what's skillful,The cleansing of one's own mind: This is the Buddhas' teaching.

Bakmoon wrote:I don't think they are that different. I think that they have all the same factors as each other, the only difference being Vipassana Jhana has one of the four Satipatthana as its object and Samatha Jhana has something else as its object.

I think there are some clear examples of Vipassana Jhana even in the Suttas themselves.Take a look at MN 111 for example. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.htmlIn it, the Ven. Sariputta goes through the Jhanas and analyses their Jhana factors and sees them as impermanent. That sounds like Vipassana Jhana to me. In fact, I am of the opinion that many if not most of the teachers who teach Jhana these days are also teaching Vipassana Jhana because they base it on the Satipatthana.

Hmm, ok, looks like you are right. This appears to be my thread for Being Totally Wrong.

Then, saturated with joy, you will put an end to suffering and stress.SN 9.11

Oh no now it's all getting mixed up with Vipassana Jhanas, which are totally different from Samatha Jhanas, which is what people are usually talking about when they mention jhana.

What historical bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

I don't think they are that different. I think that they have all the same factors as each other, the only difference being Vipassana Jhana has one of the four Satipatthana as its object and Samatha Jhana has something else as its object.

I think there are some clear examples of Vipassana Jhana even in the Suttas themselves.Take a look at MN 111 for example. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.htmlIn it, the Ven. Sariputta goes through the Jhanas and analyses their Jhana factors and sees them as impermanent. That sounds like Vipassana Jhana to me. In fact, I am of the opinion that many if not most of the teachers who teach Jhana these days are also teaching Vipassana Jhana because they base it on the Satipatthana.

so basically you can reach jhana using vipassana as opposed to some other technique?

Oh no now it's all getting mixed up with Vipassana Jhanas, which are totally different from Samatha Jhanas, which is what people are usually talking about when they mention jhana.

What historiScal bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

I don't think they are that different. I think that they have all the same factors as each other, the only difference being Vipassana Jhana has one of the four Satipatthana as its object and Samatha Jhana has something else as its object.

I think there are some clear examples of Vipassana Jhana even in the Suttas themselves.Take a look at MN 111 for example. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.htmlIn it, the Ven. Sariputta goes through the Jhanas and analyses their Jhana factors and sees them as impermanent. That sounds like Vipassana Jhana to me. In fact, I am of the opinion that many if not most of the teachers who teach Jhana these days are also teaching Vipassana Jhana because they base it on the Satipatthana.

so basically you can reach jhana using vipassana as opposed to some other technique?

Yes. By practicing satipatthana, if you enter the Jhanas, you will be entering the Vipassana Jhanas. If your meditation object is something else, you will either not enter Jhana at all, or enter into the Samatha Jhanas. The only significant difference in terms of result is that the Vipassana Jhanas develop both Samatha and Vipassana, whereas the Samatha Jhanas by themselves only Develop Samatha.

The non-doing of any evil, The performance of what's skillful,The cleansing of one's own mind: This is the Buddhas' teaching.

Oh no now it's all getting mixed up with Vipassana Jhanas, which are totally different from Samatha Jhanas, which is what people are usually talking about when they mention jhana.

What historiScal bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place? Should have stuck with Stages Of Insight or something less easily confused.

I don't think they are that different. I think that they have all the same factors as each other, the only difference being Vipassana Jhana has one of the four Satipatthana as its object and Samatha Jhana has something else as its object.

I think there are some clear examples of Vipassana Jhana even in the Suttas themselves.Take a look at MN 111 for example. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.htmlIn it, the Ven. Sariputta goes through the Jhanas and analyses their Jhana factors and sees them as impermanent. That sounds like Vipassana Jhana to me. In fact, I am of the opinion that many if not most of the teachers who teach Jhana these days are also teaching Vipassana Jhana because they base it on the Satipatthana.

Yes. By practicing satipatthana, if you enter the Jhanas, you will be entering the Vipassana Jhanas. If your meditation object is something else, you will either not enter Jhana at all, or enter into the Samatha Jhanas. The only significant difference in terms of result is that the Vipassana Jhanas develop both Samatha and Vipassana, whereas the Samatha Jhanas by themselves only Develop Samatha.

James the Giant wrote:What historical bhikkhu started using the term Vipassana Jhana in the first place?

U Pandita was the first to coin the term Vipassana Jhana, but I believe that the concept exists under the name lakkhaṇūpanijjhāna (I think that translates to Jhana based on the characteristics but I'm no Pali scholar) in the commentaries.

Sayadaw U Pandita's teacher, the Venerable Mahasi Sayadaw, already used this term and says it derived from lakkhaṇūpanijjhāna. In 1962, Mahasi Sayadaw gave a discourse on the Wheel of Dhamma in which he mentions two types of jhana: samatha jhana and vipassana jhana. The latter is explained by him as "contemplating on the three characteristics constitute vipassana jhana".